SANDEEP MEHTA, J. - (1.) Through this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner herein has approached this Court for assailing the order (Annexure-10) dated 12.03.2018 passed by the DIG, Stamps in Case No.87/2017 whereby, a stamp duty inclusive of penalty and interest to the tune of Rs.3,14,83,010/- was raised against the petitioner.
(2.) Shri Sunil Benwial, learned counsel representing the petitioner submits that though, it is true that statutory remedy of revision before Tax Board lies against the said order but as per him, in view of the Supreme Court Judgment rendered in the case of Smt. Har Devi Asnani v. State of Rajasthan and Ors., reported in AIR 2011 SC 3748, where the demand of deficit stamp duty raised is exorbitant and arbitrary, the alternative remedy of revision cannot come in the way of litigant in approaching the High Court directly in its writ jurisdiction. He further submits that in the present case, Shri Kamal Chand Sipani was inducted in the Company as a Director and he was authorised to sell 11 sq. mtrs. of the Company's land. The due stamp duty was charged on the said sale. However, later on, the respondents have raised highly unreasonable and arbitrary demand for deficit stamp duty on the entire property of the Company even though it continues to stand in the Company's name. He thus contended that the impugned demand raised from the petitioner vide the order (Annexure-10) dated 12.03.2018 is liable to be struck down.
(3.) The matter requires consideration.;